- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Claim That the CIA "Raided" the ODNI is a False Narrative
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:24 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:24 pm to boosiebadazz
Imagine having to explain to two dipshit "lawyers" why original documents are important and preferable to photocopies. 
frickin retards.
frickin retards.
This post was edited on 5/14/26 at 1:28 pm
1
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:30 pm to AlterEd
Tell us why, Ed. I look forward to your explanation of how and when documents can be authenticated and then hearsay and the relevant exceptions.
This post was edited on 5/14/26 at 1:33 pm
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:32 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Tell us why, Ed.
Are you seriously sitting here, as a frickin "lawyer", claiming you don't understand why the preservation of the original copies of sensitive documents is important?
Just how fricking stupid are you? Because this is some Simple Jack shite you and the other "lawyer" are talking about in here.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:35 pm to AlterEd
It depends on why you think it’s important. Are you concerned about their admissibility into court cases?
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:37 pm to boosiebadazz
In other words, yes, you and SFP are both frickin retards.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:40 pm to AlterEd
Do you think a witness cannot authenticate a photocopy of a document?
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:43 pm to boosiebadazz
There are many reasons why original copies would be preferable to digitized copies. For instance, often times digital copies are redacted whereas originals are not. Boxes of documents may also contain unique items such as hand written notes that are not copied. Also, with intelligence agencies operating on a strict need-to-know basis, often times, even if there are copies, retaining the original copies can stymie declassification efforts. And there are even more reasons. But this alone is enough to show you to be the fricking fool you are.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:46 pm to AlterEd
quote:
There are many reasons why original copies would be preferable to digitized copies. For instance, often times digital copies are redacted whereas originals are not. Boxes of documents may also contain unique items such as hand written notes that are not copied. Also, with intelligence agencies operating on a strict need-to-know basis, often times, even if there are copies, retaining the original copies can stymie declassification efforts. And there are even more reasons. But this alone is enough to show you to be the fricking fool you are.
@gork, can you confirm this?
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:49 pm to lsuguy84
Anyone who puts even the slightest bit of thought into it can confirm it. In this thread you have two "lawyers" claiming that theft of government property is no big deal because the ODNI likely has copies of the files.
They're fricking morons.
They're fricking morons.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:49 pm to AlterEd
quote:
Who is saying this? Certainly not me.
What did you mean by this then?
quote:
I would imagine they intend to destroy the documents.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:52 pm to AlterEd
None of those are real concerns
I can make copies, both hard copy and digital, of handwritten notes. I can save versions both redacted and unredacted.
It’s actually much more simple than you’re making it. A witness can authenticate a photocopy of a document and while the substance of the document is by definition hearsay, there are various exceptions that can make it admissible based simply on its substance or the circumstances by which it was created.
None of that relies on the literal physical provenance of the document.
I can make copies, both hard copy and digital, of handwritten notes. I can save versions both redacted and unredacted.
It’s actually much more simple than you’re making it. A witness can authenticate a photocopy of a document and while the substance of the document is by definition hearsay, there are various exceptions that can make it admissible based simply on its substance or the circumstances by which it was created.
None of that relies on the literal physical provenance of the document.
This post was edited on 5/14/26 at 1:54 pm
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:55 pm to Powerman
quote:
What did you mean by this then?
Are you trying to bat .1000 on retarded? Here, listen to Anna Paulina Luna say it herself. If you want to jump ahead to where she says it it's at about the 1:30 mark.
So again, I'm reporting what the people in the middle of this are saying.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:55 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
None of those are real concerns
Yes they are.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:56 pm to AlterEd
Only to retards who don’t understand the rules of evidence.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:57 pm to AlterEd
quote:
Are you trying to bat .1000 on retarded?
I'm just trying to figure out how they're going to destroy something that has duplicate copies made
Why would you say that and then imply that you didn't think that there was only one copy? It doesn't make sense? And I don't think you know how decimals work either.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 1:59 pm to AlterEd
quote:
Anyone who puts even the slightest bit of thought into it can confirm it. In this thread you have two "lawyers" claiming that theft of government property is no big deal because the ODNI likely has copies of the files.
They're not saying the theft itself is no big deal
They're refuting your dumb claim that the evidence in the documents can be effectively "destroyed"
You're the one that said it bud
Posted on 5/14/26 at 2:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Then why would the CIA engage in such an operation to destroy one (of many) copies of documents?
That would be retarded, as it would do nothing for them.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 2:01 pm to Powerman
quote:
I'm just trying to figure out how they're going to destroy something that has duplicate copies made
So tell me you didn't listen to what she said without telling me you didn't listen to what she said.
The CIA claims that everything was either released or previously destroyed. They destroyed MK Ultra documents back in 1973. This is known. And now they have stolen these documents from the ODNI. Documents they previously said were either released or destroyed.
So aside from the reasons I already listed as to why retention of the original documents is important, you also have the possibility that there are no more copies.
quote:
And I don't think you know how decimals work either
Says the guy who only yesterday proved he doesn't know what the frick a gambling site is and also that he can't read.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 2:02 pm to Powerman
quote:
They're refuting your dumb claim that the evidence in the documents can be effectively "destroyed"
Hillary did it and y'all almost elected her president.
Posted on 5/14/26 at 2:12 pm to AlterEd
I didn't post this morning, because many here dismiss the Conservative Treehouse as nothing but conservative conspiracy theories, but Sundance at the lays this out perfectly and accurately.
Ratcliffe and Tulsi have been working together effectively at attempting to disassemble the very entity within the IC Brennan described.
I'm nobody but some guy on a message board, but I recommend reading the linked article and checking out the CT's daily information. Perform your own due diligence.
LINK
Ratcliffe and Tulsi have been working together effectively at attempting to disassemble the very entity within the IC Brennan described.
I'm nobody but some guy on a message board, but I recommend reading the linked article and checking out the CT's daily information. Perform your own due diligence.
LINK
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News